Thoughts and updates from the great frontier of life.

Saving a denomination

I have a variety of reflections from the Mennonite Church USA national convention that was held in Pittsburgh, PA this last week. This is just one, hopefully there will be more coming yet.

I went to this convention not knowing for sure if MCUSA would survive past the convention. The reason was because it felt like there is currently an abnormally large amount of tension in the denomination right now. There are a lot of issues that are causing tension but the big one is homosexuality, mainly because of one particular situation.

In the spring of this year a Mennonite pastor in Western District Conference performed a same sex union ceremony. This has been done before, but every other time the pastor was disciplined in some form by their local conference. This time, however, the area conference credentialing committee reviewed her credentials and found them to be in good order. That’s a first.

The conference that I’m in (South Central Conference) overlaps with WDC and they have been at odds with each other for their whole history. There are a lot of reasons for this that I won’t go into, but the short of it that they’re not exactly thrilled with each other to begin with. At the SCC annual gathering in June, the tension in the air was palpable. From a variety of conversations I had the sense that I got was that this tension, and even outright anger, at WDC was not limited to the neighborhood and that it was shared by other conferences throughout the denomination. Perhaps it is simply because of where I live, but the tensions over this seemed so great that I fully expected a full on, knock down drag out fight on the delegate floor at convention, possibly even resulting in entire conferences leaving the denomination.

This didn’t happen. I think there are three reasons why.

1) Shane Hipps opening message. Shane brought the most pointed and most gutsy sermon I’ve heard in a very long time. I knew that he was right on because half of the time I found myself cheering what he was saying and half of the time I was ticked off because he hit me where it hurt. Most importantly, though, he named the theological tension in the air (i.e. purity or righteousness) and re-framed them both in light of reconciliation as the higher value. That sermon called out two groups who came to the convention ready for battle and set a tone of reconciliation and common ground rather than trying to defeat an adversary.

2) The conversation rooms. A new feature of the convention was the conversation rooms. It was a space set up to discuss the most contentious issues in the church with trained mediators to help focus and direct the conversation in a positive and helpful way. Ultimately, they weren’t perfect and there is room for improvement. However, the effect they had on the delegate sessions was significant. People want to talk about these issues and they want to be heard. The open mic time at the delegate sessions is an exceedingly bad place and way to do that, but at previous conventions it was the only place to attempt to be heard. To be sure, there were some pointed, direct and personal comments made during the main open mic time, but the level of hostility and divisiveness that I was expecting just never showed up. I suspect that this is due in large part to the fact that people had a place to actually have the conversations and arguments on a large scale in a place where they could be heard, thus reducing the need for people to try and hijack the open mic time.

3) Ervin Stutzman. I’ll be the first to admit that I had serious questions about Ervin when he started as Executive Director of MCUSA. As I’ve come to have more time and experience with him, my respect for him has increased by leaps and bounds. This is mainly for a couple of reasons. a) his has the ability to speak to people of all points on the Mennonite spectrum in a way that is deeply respectful and takes each one seriously as a part of the body of Christ and members of the church. b) in the midst of some very tense situation he has a non-anxious presence that reduces everyones anxiety level. c) he (and the exec. board) has worked very hard to paint a picture of a vision for MCUSA that does not deny the existence of difficult issues, but that does not let them dominate our work and mission as a church. All of this came out at the convention from top to bottom. Am I going to agree with him all the time? Nope, not by a long shot. But I do respect him and trust him.

I genuinely don’t know the future of the denomination. There is much that I’m very hopeful for, but there is not guarantee that we’ll be celebrating 20 years as a denomination. Even 6 months or a year from now the denomination could look very different. But for the moment, we’ve taken a step in the right direction as a denomination.

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

7 Responses

Thanks for this insight. I shared your concern that a “perfect storm” was brewing headed into Pittsburg. it sounds like a prophetic word from Shane and some strategic moves on the part of MC USA headed off the storm, at least in Pittsburg.

That’s where my ongoing concern sets in. There is a difference between having a “controversy free” convention and having a unified church. The overwhelming passage of the “Pittsburg Experiment” may also indicate a delegate body that’s simply grown weary of dealing with divisive issues. But as you point out, there is no lack of anxiety/confusion/anger at the conference level, especially over homosexuality.

So it sounds like the conversation rooms were good. But it sounds like they were good and keeping divisive issues off the delegate floor. Lets hope that not fighting over divisive issues doesn’t just cause institutional gang-green to set in.

My direct contact with Ervin has led me to be suspicious so I’m glad to hear that you have a growing trust in him and his leadership. He’s clearly a good rhetorician. I do not envy the position he has. It’s not quite Lincoln holding the union together, but his vision for MC USA seems to rest on having congregations and conferences. He’s also more aware of the threats to that vision.

Al – I appreciate some of your thoughts, but not all. I would like to add that a good many folks in both the WDC and the SCC fully love and appreciate each other – me included. As one who is working for both area conferences, and been a member of churches in both, I am troubled by this statement, this quote: ” The conference that I’m in (South Central Conference) overlaps with WDC and they have been at odds with each other for their whole history. There are a lot of reasons for this that I won’t go into, but the short of it that they’re not exactly thrilled with each other to begin with,” unquote. I am concerned that your words may serve to limit future nudging of the Spirit and may serve to stymie further cooperation and respect between our area conferences. I would like to also encourage you in the future to shy away from over-generalizations regarding the beliefs and practices and theology of one area conference or another. In every congregation and area conference – there is exhibited a full range of these, and it is our reality, our burden and our hope in Christ.
Marlene Bogard.

Marlene, your point is well taken. I don’t want to minimize the work that you and many other bridge builders have done. The over-generalization is not helpful, and (in this case) does not actually reflect what I believe or hope for. My hope is that someday the two conference could, in fact, come together. And ultimately, I’d like to be a part of helping to make that happen. My simplified statement that you quoted is, however, partially reflective of the fact that I’ve come to see the relationship between the two conferences with new eyes as I have settled into a new church and new conference. Namely, I’ve begun to really learn (and appreciate) how different the two conferences really are. It’s not just polity or theology, there’s a whole cultural gap and way of telling history that is much deeper than I once appreciated. The link in the article above in the sentence you quoted unpacks some of what I think some of the differences that need to be bridged to move forward. As I’ve continued to ponder why the two conferences are still separate, and as I’ve asked various historians and theologians on both sides, I find myself feeling as though it all just boils down to the fact that we just don’t want to. Neither side has the institutional will or need to make it happen…at least at this point in time. I realize that that’s a pretty pessimistic view, but I still hold out hope for a shared future between the two conferences.

I should also say, for the record, that I am very aware that WDC is not a homogeneous conference. In fact, I had a conversation at conference with someone from you neck of the woods where we talked about the fact that WDC probably has a much wider spectrum of churches than MC USA does on average. The diversity of churches within WDC is truly amazing, I don’t know if it will last forever, but for the moment it’s impressive.

Hopefully that brings some more balance to the over simplified statement that I made.

The video probably isn’t available online. The only thing that as streamed was the delegate sessions, and that was a first for convention. Shane’s sermon should be available if you buy the DVDs of worship speakers. That isn’t very cheap but it’s available on the mcusa website. I wonder if anyone at the seminary is ordering a set. Could be worth checking.

I’m just not sure Shane Hipps sermon had that much to do with it-it was a powerful message, for sure, but I think its usually wiser to presume rhetoric doesn’t change much. I don’t know anyone who felt like fighting less because of his message. Rather, I think most people came hoping not to fight.

I also think part of it is just that people weren’t given a forum to have a fight-the Pittsburgh Experiment meant that there was no vote that was divisive.

Have you considered cross posting this at YAR? I’d be curious as to their reflections as well.

Alan’s Blog

Just so you know who I actually am, my name is Alan Stucky and I'm a thinker, feeler, photographer, lover, man of faith, doubter, passionate, pastor, apathetic, ex-football player, tech-nerd, and a whole host of other things. It'll all probably come up at some point.